
[Sponsors] 
Cavitation transient calculation inside a nozzle  need comment about the residual 

LinkBack  Thread Tools  Display Modes 
November 11, 2014, 06:52 
Cavitation transient calculation inside a nozzle  need comment about the residual

#1 
Member
Anh
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 42
Rep Power: 3 
Hi, I am new in CFD
Now I am doing cavitation transient calculation inside a nozzle for my thesis. I read in the fluent user guid that, the residual should be reduce 2 or 3 order. But I do not really understand that. This is residual plot from my calculation. Could you tell me how good this residual is? Thank you very much! 

November 11, 2014, 06:57 

#2 
Member
Anh
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 42
Rep Power: 3 
For more information, in the monitor residual panel, I turn off the crition check. Is it OK?


November 11, 2014, 07:14 

#3  
Senior Member
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 699
Rep Power: 9 
Quote:
Your continuity (white line) goes from 0.008 to 0.0008, so that is a factor 10. I don't know what happened before iteration 1500, but if you really started at iteration 1500, I would say this is poor convergence. 

November 11, 2014, 07:19 

#4 
Member
Anh
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 42
Rep Power: 3 
Thank your quik answe,
I did steady calculation for single phase for first 1500 inter. after that change to unsteady and cavitation model. As you sad, continuity residual is poor. How to improve the convergen? Ps: Also, I get message:"reversed flow at xxx face on pressureoutlet". So it may cause that problem to poor convergence 

November 11, 2014, 09:43 

#5 
Senior Member
Daniele
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Italy
Posts: 949
Rep Power: 15 
Usually for cavitation simulations time step should be very small: I usually set a maximum time step of 1e5 down to 1e7.
Extend your domain at the outlet, plot contour to see what is causing reverse flow.
__________________
Google is your friend and the same for the search button! 

November 11, 2014, 10:13 

#6  
Member
Anh
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 42
Rep Power: 3 
Quote:
Extend the domain may be effect to the solution? Because in the nozzle flow, pressure fall down to saturation pressure and increase to reach pressure at outlet. So I think if domain extended, then pressure will be slowly to reach outlet pressure, and the aspect of cavity will be different. 

November 11, 2014, 10:16 

#7 
Senior Member
Daniele
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Italy
Posts: 949
Rep Power: 15 
I think no, not so much..if you extend, for example, the outlet 10 cm far, you have only more pressure drop due to 10 cm pipe (which are negligible). You can always subtract this pressure drop at the "new" outlet.
I think it will not affect the cavity length.
__________________
Google is your friend and the same for the search button! 

November 11, 2014, 10:24 

#8 
Member
Anh
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 42
Rep Power: 3 
Uhm, I see. You are right. And how about the residual? How to improve tohave the good convergency. I dont think have any problem to grid. The grid is structure and I checked: othogonal, skewness, aspect ratio which are good.


November 11, 2014, 10:28 

#9  
Senior Member
Daniele
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Italy
Posts: 949
Rep Power: 15 
Quote:
It seems you have no problems in residual behaviour: I think that lowering the time step and adding some more iterations per time step (like 4050) should do the trick.
__________________
Google is your friend and the same for the search button! 

November 11, 2014, 10:34 

#10 
Member
Anh
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 42
Rep Power: 3 
Thank you for your comment, ghost82!


November 14, 2014, 04:43 

#11  
Member
Anh
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 42
Rep Power: 3 
Quote:
I extended the domain and reduced the timestep and also increased interation per timestep. The message: "the reserved flow at XXX face on pressure outlet" gone. And I think I got better residual. I upload the picture about new timestep and residual as below. How do you think about this? 

November 14, 2014, 05:02 

#12 
Senior Member
Daniele
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Italy
Posts: 949
Rep Power: 15 
Hi, I think it's ok.
__________________
Google is your friend and the same for the search button! 

April 27, 2015, 06:02 
Conslultation

#13 
New Member
jiri kozak
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 18
Rep Power: 4 
Hello,
Have you succeeded with your simulation? I'm solving cavitation in the nozzle with circular cross section, using 2D axisymmetric solver, RSM model of turbulence and SchneerSauer model of cavitation (Ansys Fluent 15). I did simulations of 5 operating points until now. The loss coefficient seems quite ok compared to the experimental data. But (there is always some but unfortunately), there is significant difference of the vortex ring separation frequency (the frequency is lower). I was using quite long time step (2.5e5 s), therefore I'm trying to simulate one operating point using 1e5 s length of time step. It seems quite promising on the other hand the continuity residuals are still quite large (something about 3e3 at the end of the time step with 40 iterations). So is there some certain value of the continuity residual when you can assume that the result will be correct? The second question is about the computational domain, mine one has the outlet part long as ten diameters of the pipe behind the diffuser. Is it enough? And how much can the length of the outlet part of the domain influence the dynamics of the vortex ring separation. Thank you for any advice and have a nice day 

Thread Tools  
Display Modes  


Similar Threads  
Thread  Thread Starter  Forum  Replies  Last Post 
Simulation seems to converge but crashes suddenly  xxxx  OpenFOAM  16  September 12, 2014 08:07 
transsonic nozzle with rhoSimpleFoam  Unseen  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  7  April 16, 2014 03:38 
a problem with convergence in buoyantSimpleFoam  skuznet  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  5  February 19, 2014 05:30 
Micro Scale Pore, icoFoam  gooya_kabir  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  2  November 2, 2013 14:58 
Why RNGkepsilon model gives floating error  shipman  OpenFOAM Running, Solving & CFD  3  September 7, 2013 08:00 